Ram Prasad @ Bhaku Lal Cherva vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 792 Chatt

                                          1

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                    Order Sheet
                              CR.A. No. 1723 of 2019
Ram Prasad @ Bhaku Lal Cherva, S/o. Lagan Sai Cherva, aged about 20 years, R/
o. Village Baswani, Police Station Sonhat, District Korea Chhattisgarh.
                                                                        ---- Appellant
                                      Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, through : Police Station Sonhat, District Korea Chhattisgarh.
                                                                    ---- Respondent

Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, counsel for the appellant. 15/02/2022 Ms. Shivali Dubey, P.L. for the State.

Heard on I.A. No.1/19, application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.

for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

Appellant has been convicted by the judgment of conviction and

order of sentence dated 03.11.2017, passed in S.T. No.68/2016, by

the learned Sessions Judge, Baikunthpur, District- Korea (C.G.) in the

following manner :-

U/s. 302 of the Indian Penal : Life imprisonment (Thrice) and Code (Thrice) fine of Rs.500/- (Three times) and in default of payment of fine, further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment more.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that

the conviction against the appellant is totally erroneous and without

the evidence of prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. The only

evidence on which the learned trial Court has placed reliance to

convict the appellant is the statement of witnesses Parmanand (P.W.-

2) and Suresh Kumar (P.W.-3), who saw the appellant coming out of

the house, in which, three deceased persons were found murdered.

Apart from that, there is no evidence to incriminate the appellant.

Hence, the appellant has good case to argue, therefore, the

application be allowed and the sentence imposed upon the appellant

be suspended.

Per contra, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for

suspension of sentence and grant of bail. It is submitted that it is a

case of triple murder and the circumstance of which the Parmanand

(P.W.-2) and Suresh Kumar (P.W.-3) are the witnesses is very strong

circumstance, regarding which the appellant has not given any

explanation, therefore, there is no case present in favour of the

appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Hence, the

application be rejected.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused

the records of the trial Court.

Considered on the submissions. After perusing the evidence

present on record, we are of the considered view that the application

for suspension of sentence and grant of bail is not fit to be allowed,

therefore, it is rejected.

Let this case be listed for final hearing in due course.

                       Sd/-                                 Sd/-
balram          (R.C.S. Samant)                    (Arvind Singh Chandel)
                     Judge                                 Judge